It’s been a critical few weeks and it’s hard to figure out what’s going on, whether "Plus Up" will work, and so on. I sure don’t blame bloggers for airing confusion, doubts and asking questions. In fact, I read blogs specifically to read others’ opinions and analyses. Glenn Reynolds, for example, has long claimed that the war in Iraq is critical to the war on terror, and that the war on terror is the most important issue we face. So I spent today reading his blog to see where he stands on "Plus Up". Er: no clue. Maybe you guys can help, by reading more closely. On the current page, which goes back to January 14, there are dozens and dozens of short links but what Glenn actually thinks is very hard to judge. Here are some of the few posts that even refer to Iraq:
WITH MICHAEL YON REPORTING THAT "IRAQ IS VERY WINNABLE," Dean Barnett wonders what if the surge works? I think it won’t be allowed to work, at least in terms of media reporting and public perception, if the press has anything to say about it.
MICHAEL YON REPORTS: "Iraq is very winnable."
OMAR REPORTS that insurgents in Baghdad are already running away: "the bad guys are adjusting their plans as the government and US military adjust theirs." That’s how it works, generally.
There’s a link to Hugh Hewitt’s post, accusing anyone with doubts about "Plus Up" of being "retreatists." Is that Reynolds’ position? Here’s a post where he bravely comes out as "agnostic" on the new strategy. Well, it’s better than silence. But, really, is agnosticism enough at this point? Lives are at stake – and his views would be welcome.
The Dish 